I assume when you say 'conscious' you mean 'conscience'? As Conscious is being awake and aware.

Yes, conscience. Basically the majority of the human population can and does feel pain, remorse, and can feel for other people, but there's a good %3 who can't. And that 3%, for whatever reason, tend to make up the %50 of those in jail. No one knows if this is something that's learned or if people are just born this way, but it goes along with many criminals having an anti-social personality disorder. It makes rehabilitation really difficult because those sort of people don't feel remorse for their crimes and they certainly don't care about society's rules. They are the kind of people who don't follow rules because they understand right and wrong but because they don't want to get caught and in end up in prison.

So basically, what I'm saying is you can't rehabilitate everyone because there's too many of these kinds of people in prison settings who just don't care about what they are doing.

Basically the majority of the human population can and does feel pain, remorse, and can feel for other people, but there's a good %3 who can't. And that 3%, for whatever reason, tend to make up the %50 of those in jail.

Do you have a source for this statistic? Common sense dictates that there is no way this could possibly be true.

Um no. lol If you can't stay on subject, I'm going to have to ask Sally to come moderate this topic. Either be respectful or get out. Thank you.

Then shut up about psychopaths and sociopaths if you don't want me to analyze your reading of the differences between them and such. If you can't stay on subject, I'm going to have to ask Sally to come moderate this topic.

Do you have a source for this statistic? Common sense dictates that there is no way this could possibly be true.

It's in the book "The Sociopath next door". It's really not that hard to believe since it takes a special kind of person to just not give a fuck about societal rules.

Quote:

Then shut up about psychopaths and sociopaths if you don't want me to analyze your reading of the differences between them and such. If you can't stay on subject, I'm going to have to ask Sally to come moderate this topic.

Go ahead. I'm sure she'd love to see how disrespectful you are to people who don't agree with you.

I agree that some people can't be saved. I don't agree that they make up half the people in prison.

While I accept that there be exist people for whom rehabilitation is not the answer or the best option, I will not accept that we should not give people a chance just because we think they are no hopers. I will go more into this later.

Quote:

If there is an extraordinarily negligible chance of their rehabilitation and the crime they committed is heinous, then the death penalty is better than a lifetime sentence, both for the families who suffered and for the state.

You know, about 100,000 people in the UK signed a petition to bring back the death penalty for certain crimes such as pedophilia - and lets face it, pedophilia is about as abhorrent as a crime can get due to the valuable nature of the victims.

Do you also know that most pedophiles hate themselves and there is currently a very successful programme in the UK where pedophiles live very productive lives in their own community. Many of them even choose to take the sip, so as to destroy any chance of them falling to temptation again.

I am not saying this programme will work for all or that every pedophile will be repentant, but this shows that everyone, even those who commit the worst of crimes, deserves some sort of chance at this, at least.

Moritz College of Law published a paper which has also shown that most victims of crime actually feel far more justice at the criminals showing remorse for the wrongs they have committed against the victims than they do at seeing criminals publicly humiliated.

Quote:

A thief, perhaps, but aren't you also dehumanizing the thief you seek to rehabilitate? In america most people in prison are blacks. This thief is, statistically speaking, most likely black. Their kind of background is likely lower-class with all the cultural problems that modern lower-class african-american communities have, or he most likely wouldn't have ended up in prison in the first place. He has friends, a family, and a poorly-thought-out reason for having stolen what he did. Most likely he's just a punk that doesn't pose much danger if you teach him what the right thing to do is and give him the tools to deal with that. The victims most likely only suffered a loss of a few thousand dollars, so punishment in itself doesn't fit the crime.

Quote:

OK, I now see where you are coming from - and I can somewhat more empathise with your point.

However, first, your whole black people point does not really lead anywhere, so I am not going to engage with that because while the stats probably do back you up in the USA, in the UK white males make up a vast majority of our prison population. This, to my mind, shows that your point about social class is probably far more relevant.

In this situation, obviously, rehabilitation is a better choice. But what would you do for a murderer, or as biggles said, a mass-murderer? Teach them the folly of their ways by making them dig ditches and paint fences? I'm sorry, but that's going easy on them. They deserve to suffer for their crimes. They deserve to die if they cannot be rehabilitated.

The point of rehabilitation is ultimately to help them fit in with society as a whole. Practically, that means helping them get a job, since having a job is likely going to integrate them back into society in the fastest manner. It'll also raise their income level to lower the chance they'll commit any crime involving money at all. Some people deserve this help. Other people clearly don't, and not offering the death sentence for those most heinous of criminals is a simple act of mercy.

Secondly, I was referring to thieves and other low-level criminals, so to attack me on the murderer front seems to be attacking me for a point I never made. I never said that I would have murderers painting fences; clearly any rehabilitation order given for them would need to be vastly different to one given to someone charged with thief - this is so blatantly obvious, I am amazed I need to make it explicit.

That being said, I actually do believe there is a fair debate to be had for whether rehabilitation is suitable for murderers and other high-level criminals, so I will address it in due course.

So, as I said previously, while I would hesitate to refute the point that there will be people who do not response to rehabilitation, I will not accept the idea that there are those who do not even deserve the chance and that we should just give up on people before we even try.

One of the most famous criminals ever executed was a prostitute was spent her whole life being raped, beaten and abused before she finally went insane and became a mass-murderer. This is someone whom had been destroyed and forsaken by society and then that same society which failed to protect her had the gull to judge and even execute her. I believe she was not evil or 'beyond saving', but the problem is society was so busy judging her that no one ever even tried. If me believing this makes me a soft-touch, then so be, at least I am strong enough to admit when society - and myself as a part of it - failed.

Her execution was not an act of mercy, it was a final act of mockery at the sick and twisted joke which had been her life - a life which we had been all too willing to waste.

As for your idea that they are 'better off dead than in prison'; well, you may believe that, but that is not a judgement call you can make. If society wishes to have a moral compass and deem that taking the life of another is wrong, then society must live by that rule, as well, otherwise we become the very thing we are trying to protect ourselves from, as the case above shows.

Furthermore, as I have shown, even the most heinous of criminals can show remorse and turn their lives around - if we want to live in a right-minded and free society, then we must give them the chance. We probably cannot undo the wrongs they have committed, but us committing an equal wrong is not going to in anyway make the previous better. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

Quote:

Either way, my point here was to attempt to dispel the absolutist theocracy that punishing criminals is somehow bad in every way. There is a group that benefits from it, albeit in an intangible way, so it is not inherently bad in every way.

[

I see that now and it is a concept I can empathise with, but I feel that while there may be a truth to the idea that rehabilitation will not work for all; it would we a great atrocity for us not to try.

QUOTE]
AllisonWalker, quit talking out your ass. I read what you said about social disorders and it sounds almost completely like bullshit. I'm not even going to dignify it with a specific response. Don't play with the big boys if you can't hit the ball.[/QUOTE]

Indeed, my sister and a chief psychiatric nurse of 7 years experience in some of the UKs most famous prisons for the criminally insane, with a host of psychological training under her belt and a masters to come thinks she talking out of her arse, so there we go.

The only statistic which comes anywhere close to agreeing with her is that about 60 per cent of those with criminals records are diagnosed with 'mental illness'; however, the majority of these have things such as depression, so I would hardly call them 'sociopaths'. :P

I never once said they were pyschopaths, smart one. I said 50% of people in prison fall into the description of being a sociopath, which falls into having an anti-personality disorder, which is not anything like being a psychopath. Note even close. If you're going to call me wrong, how about you not switch around terms for disorders that you clearly don't understand the differences between, Fared.

Anti-social personality disorder goes a little farther than just being depressed, too. I'm really doubting their of you know anything about what you're talking about because I know from my own professional background of actually having worked in clinic psychology and talking to providers that this is the case for many people who are incarcerated.

I don't really know what this thread is about and I also don't know all the scientific terms for different syndromes and disorders.
What I do know however is that I myself am social incompetent, by which I mean that I don't instinctively know how do deal with other humans, often behave in a way that hurts others and don't feel compassion. But still I am trying my best to make others happy, even though I usually fail. I don't want to make them happy because I would suffer from bad conscience or compassion, in fact I could be evil without feeling guilty, but I care for everyone, because the value of an emotion doesn't change depending on who has that emotion. my joy isn't better than other people's joy, therefore I try gaining the most happiness for everyone and not only for myself. On the other hand my mother, who works in jail, told me that most prisoners are very nice, even the murderers. Social competence has nothing to do with being a good human.
If this doesn't fit the topic, I am sorry. didn't mean to bother you.

I never once said they were pyschopaths, smart one. I said 50% of people in prison fall into the description of being a sociopath, which falls into having an anti-personality disorder, which is not anything like being a psychopath. Note even close. If you're going to call me wrong, how about you not switch around terms for disorders that you clearly don't understand the differences between, Fared.

Anti-social personality disorder goes a little farther than just being depressed, too. I'm really doubting their of you know anything about what you're talking about because I know from my own professional background of actually having worked in clinic psychology and talking to providers that this is the case for many people who are incarcerated.

Actually, you are the one who has no idea what you are on about, my sister is a trained psychologist and laughs at pseudo-intellectuals like yourself who try and make out that there is a distinct line between the terms, when actually, there is not. If you actually understood the two terms, then you know that both your descriptions could apply equally to one or the other because they are not actually the definitions behind the words. The very definitions you have used from the start are wrong and the only people stupid enough to think they are right those who learnt pop-psychology from the internet.

However, if you are going to be precious about it, then I shall revert it to sociopath for you; I really do not care because you are still wrong - having an anti-social personality disorder is not the same as being a sociopath.

Furthermore, 50 per cent of prisoners do not have anti-social personality disorders, so there we have it, you are wrong, there are no statistics which back you up and the fact you were asked to provide just one, but still failed to do so is a testament to how wrong you are.

Finally, if you worked in clinical psychology, then why can you not even spell the term correctly?

Oh, and psychopath/sociopath - these are not disorders. God, do you even know the first thing about psychology?

Being polite has nothing to do with not having criminal tendencies either, though. People will fake nice to seem nice even after they've been caught. I have a coworker who used to work at a hospital for the criminally insane in California and there were plenty of times where people got complacent with them and someone would end up jumped and critically injured.

Being polite has nothing to do with not having criminal tendencies either, though. People will fake nice to seem nice even after they've been caught. I have a coworker who used to work at a hospital for the criminally insane in California and there were plenty of times where people got complacent with them and someone would end up jumped and critically injured.

may I interpret this as "criminals only act nice, they are not nice for real"?
If yes, why can't there be nice murderers?

lol Fared I'm typing fast and clinic psychology isn't the wrong spelling, it's just an awkward wording that you understand regardless. You trying to check my grammatical errors is funny coming from someone who regularly posts huge chucks of rambling sentences without any sort of paragraph structure. Please get over yourself, you're not as smart as you think.

There are differences between the terms. If you actually bothered to do some research for yourself, you'd see that, but I know you'd rather pretend to be the expert of all things rather than do your own work to back up your claims.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kronus

may I interpret this as "criminals only act nice, they are not nice for real"?
If yes, why can't there be nice murderers?

There can be "nice" murderers. They can be polite, ask you how you're doing that day, greet you and use manners, etc etc but that doesn't change the fact that they'd still fuck you up if they got the chance. They just know how to act correctly to throw people off. That goes along with the sociopathic tendencies I was talking about earlier that some people misunderstood. A sociopath will do things like that, act nice and graciously to seem like everyone else, but they are not kind people. There's a difference.

lol Fared I'm typing fast and clinic psychology isn't the wrong spelling, it's just an awkward wording that you understand regardless. You trying to check my grammatical errors is funny coming from someone who regularly posts huge chucks of rambling sentences without any sort of paragraph structure. Please get over yourself, you're not as smart as you think.

There are differences between the terms. If you actually bothered to do some research for yourself, you'd see that, but I know you'd rather pretend to be the expert of all things rather than do your own work to back up your claims.

valuing a persons argument depending on grammar and orthography is weak.

I agree, those sociopath and psychopath are two totally different things. But neither of it makes people commit crimes

There can be "nice" murderers. They can be polite, ask you how you're doing that day, greet you and use manners, etc etc but that doesn't change the fact that they'd still fuck you up if they got the chance. They just know how to act correctly to throw people off. That goes along with the sociopathic tendencies I was talking about earlier that some people misunderstood. A sociopath will do things like that, act nice and graciously to seem like everyone else, but they are not kind people. There's a difference.

why are you talking about polite? I am talking about nice.

Most people who eat meat are neither psychopaths nor sociopaths and most of them are nice too, even though they murder other humans by doing so, not caring about their misery.

No, it makes people more likely too, though. It's just a situation of "can I do this and get away with it" instead of "I shouldn't do this because it's wrong and could hurt someone". Most people with anti-personality disorders and sociopaths don't act out their impulses because they are afraid of getting caught.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kronus

why are you talking about polite? I am talking about nice.

Most people who eat meat are neither psychopaths nor sociopaths and most of them are nice too, even though they murder other humans by doing so, not caring about their misery.

Well being polite and being nice generally go hand in hand.

Slaughtering animals doesn't really go along with what we're talking about since most people would say there's a difference between killing a human being and an animal for food. Let's not get too side tracked from the original topic at hand.

lol Fared I'm typing fast and clinic psychology isn't the wrong spelling, it's just an awkward wording that you understand regardless. You trying to check my grammatical errors is funny coming from someone who regularly posts huge chucks of rambling sentences without any sort of paragraph structure. Please get over yourself, you're not as smart as you think.

There are differences between the terms. If you actually bothered to do some research for yourself, you'd see that, but I know you'd rather pretend to be the expert of all things rather than do your own work to back up your claims.

Clinic - clinical: see they are spelt differently, therefore, you spelt it wrong. Oh and please note that you made a mistake with your semantics. (Though, I was nice and corrected your erroneous use of the term 'error' for you; however, if you wish, we can consider it an error because that means you are admitting you have no idea what you are on about.)

Hmmm, who do I trust, a trained psychologist or the troll, AllsionWalker? Hmm, this is a tough one.

Allison, if you wish to be correct about it, neither term has any real clinical definition - which is why any real psychologist would not use such terms - but both refer to vague ideas about an extreme inability to live by societies norms. This is why those who know what they are on about - aka, not internet trolls - consider both terms to refer to the same thing.

No, it makes people more likely too, though. It's just a situation of "can I do this and get away with it" instead of "I shouldn't do this because it's wrong and could hurt someone". Most people with anti-personality disorders and sociopaths don't act out their impulses because they are afraid of getting caught.

that is just total nonsense, sorry.
Both of those things only prevent you from feeling guilty, having an instinctive urge not to harm others or feeling compassion. they don't stop your ability to think logically.

Allison, if you wish to be correct about it, neither term has any real clinical definition - which is why any real psychologist would not use such terms - but both refer to vague ideas about an extreme inability to live by societies norms. This is why those who know what they are on about - aka, not internet trolls - consider both terms to refer to the same thing.

that is just total nonsense, sorry.
Both of those things only prevent you from feeling guilty, having an instinctive urge not to harm others or feeling compassion. they don't stop your ability to think logically.

I didn't say anything about thinking logically. If anything, the fact that they can think logically is the reason why they don't act out crimes most of the time. Because they are afraid of getting caught, not because they know the difference between right and wrong.

When you have people in prison who legitimately don't care about causing other people suffering and just lack that kind capacity for feeling sympathetic towards others, it kind of makes it very difficult for a therapist or anyone else to make them safe around society at large.

Hence why I said in the beginning, you can't fix everyone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kronus

It is not an inability, just a difficulty.

No, sociopaths have no ability to feel compassion towards others.

But I already said numerous times that while psychologists don't diagnosis people as being sociopaths, they do talk about having sociopathic tendencies all the time (know this from first hand experience, thank you!) and can diagnosis people as having anti-social personality disorders, which usually go hand in hand.

Slaughtering animals doesn't really go along with what we're talking about since most people would say there's a difference between killing a human being and an animal for food. Let's not get too side tracked from the original topic at hand.

I am not talking about killing animales, I am talking about killing humans. eating meat inevitable causes humans to die fromstarvation, because it is physically impossible to feed everyone with our average meat consume. the surface of this planet is just too small for that.
I thought you knew that. usually you figure that out by using your brain and a calculator.

I am not talking about killing animales, I am talking about killing humans. eating meat inevitable causes humans to die fromstarvation, because it is physically impossible to feed everyone with our average meat consume. the surface of this planet is just too small for that.
I thought you knew that. usually you figure that out by using your brain and a calculator.

Or, you know, you could be more clear about what you're trying to say instead of being ungodly rude about it.

Yes, meat consumption is wasteful when compared to growing crops for food, but that really has nothing to do with this discussion. Moving on...

I never denied that.
You don't need compassion to care about others.
I don't have any compassion myself, I could cut your throat open without feeling guilty, so I speak from experience. compassion makes caring for other humans a bit more easy, but is actually unnecessary. All you need to care about other humans is the ability to think logically and sociopaths have the ability to think logically, as you said yourself. by thinking logically, you will eventually come to the conclusion, that decreasing someone else's joy a lot, for example by raping him/her, while increasing your own joy a bit, would decrease the total amount of joy in this world.

Or, you know, you could be more clear about what you're trying to say instead of being ungodly rude about it.

Yes, meat consumption is wasteful when compared to growing crops for food, but that really has nothing to do with this discussion. Moving on...

I am not trying to convince you to stop eating meat (actually I do), but I am using this as an example. most people would continue to eat meat, even when they know the consequences. they would deliberately kill other humans in order to increase their pleasure, without any guilty conscience.does that mean most people of this world have any kind of anti-social disorder or how ever it is called?

Yu-Gi-Oh is the property of Konami and Kazuki Takahashi. We are only a parody, we are not breaking any laws nor intend to. See our disclaimer and terms of use. You can also contact us. Maybe you even want to read our about us page. Smileys by David Lanham. Hosted by Cthulhu.... Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn